-
-
Film review: The World According To Monsanto
The most important documentary you will see this year.
How much outrage can a single multinational corporation inspire? How much damage can they inflict? The breathtaking new film, The World According to Monsanto, features a company that sets the new standard. From Iowa to Paraguay, from England to India, Monsanto is uprooting our food supply and replacing it with their patented genetically engineered creations. And along the way, farmers, communities, and nature become collateral damage. The Gazette says the movie "will freeze the blood in your veins." The Hour says it's a "horrifying enough picture" to warrant "fury." But most importantly, this critical film opens our eyes just in time. The film is the work of celebrated award-winning French filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, whose three years of work on four continents exposes why Monsanto has become the world's poster child for malignant corporate influence in government and technology.
Combining secret documents with accounts by victims, scientists and policy makers, she guides us through a web of misleading reports, pressure tactics, collusion, and attempted corruption. And we learn how the company systematically tricked governments into allowing dangerous genetically modified (GM) foods into our diet-with Monsanto in charge of determining if they're safe.
Deception, Deception, Deception
The company's history with some of the most toxic chemicals ever produced, illustrates why they can't be trusted. Ask the folks of Anniston, Alabama, where Monsanto's PCB factory secretly poisoned the neighborhood for decades. PCBs are Monsanto's toxic oils used as coolants and lubricants for over 50 years and are now virtually omnipresent in the blood and tissues of humans and wildlife around the globe. But Anniston residents have levels hundreds or thousands of times the average. They all know their levels, which they carry as death sentences. David Baker, who lost his little brother and most of his friends to PCB-related diseases such as cancer, says Anniston kids used to run up to him, report their PCB level and ask, "How long you think I got?"
Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group says that based on Monsanto documents made public during a trial, the company "knew the truth from the very beginning. They lied about it. They hid the truth from their neighbors." One Monsanto memo explains their justification: "We can't afford to lose one dollar of business."
snip
Replacing Nature: "Nothing Shall Be Eaten That We Don't Own" Monsanto is the world's largest seed company and many are concerned. Troy Roush says, "They are in the process of owning food, all food." Paraguayan farmer Jorge Galeano says, "Its objective is to control all of the world's food production." Renowned Indian physicist and community organizer Vandana Shiva says, "If they control seed, they control food; they know it, it's strategic. It's more powerful than bombs; it's more powerful than guns. This is the best way to control the populations of the world." The World According to Monsanto is aptly named. It is about Monsanto seeking to recreate the world in its own image, for its own benefit. They intend to replace (and patent) the entire food supply. And since their genetic pollution self-propagates in the environment, it will outlast the effects of global warming and nuclear waste. Such widespread permanent influence may not be safe with any individual or company. With Monsanto's record, the results can only be catastrophic. This powerful documentary might just inspire a global rejection of Monsanto's plans for our world. If so, it will be the most important film in history. The most important documentary you will see this year. ... more -
Farm and food: Monsanto's prices to rise on RoundUp and seeds
In late March, Monsanto Co. sent a Dear Valued Customer letter to most U.S. corn and soybean farmers. The reason, wrote Jim Zimmer, Monsanto's vice president of U.S. branded business, was to discuss some current marketplace dynamics that will directly affect you in terms of increased prices for Monsanto's line of Roundup herbicides for 2008.
Demand for glyphosate, Roundup's generic counterpart, is at an all time high, explained Zimmer. As such, we have seen the demand for Roundup brand herbicide increase more than our current ability to supply.
That's a problem, he continued, because We have a reliable supplier commitment to farmers who choose to purchase Roundup Ready technology and who choose to purchase Roundup brand herbicide that we will have supply available.
The solution?
Our competitive challenges have put our commitment at risk, forcing us to increase our price for Roundup herbicide.
Golly, a farmer who telephoned me about the letter asked, How much is their promise to me going to cost me?
Globally, about $411 million, the amount Roundup net sales increased from March through May over the same three months in 2007, according to Monsanto's third quarter, Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission June 27.
That's a 54 percent increase.
Additionally, the 10-Q reports, Net sales of Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides increased 63 percent, or $1,222 million $1.222 billion in the nine-month comparison with fiscal 2007's first three quarters.
Remarkably, however, that $1.2 billion increase in Roundup sales, notes the 10-Q, was posted despite a seven percent sales volume drop in Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides in third quarter 2008 and only an 8 percent increase in global Roundup sales for the nine-month period ending in May.
Clearly, Roundup mostly because Monsanto boosted its price hit a home run. Gross profit increased $927 million because of higher sales of Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides in the first nine months of 2008, the company said.
What Monsanto did for Roundup herbicide this spring, it promises to do for Roundup seed corn next year, according to a July interview of company officials by DTN and Progressive Farmer editors.
Indeed, wrote Marcia Taylor for DTN after the gathering, Even the list price on seed corn will topple the $300 per bag barrier starting this fall, up about $95 to $100 per bag, or 35 percent on average, according to Monsanto officials.
snip
Again, according to Monsanto's most recent 10-Q: In the first quarter 2008, Monsanto entered into an agreement on corn herbicide tolerance and insect control technologies with Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc (whereby Monsanto will receive) cumulative cash receipts of $725 million over an eight-year period.
In third quarter 2008, Monsanto and Syngenta entered into a Roundup Ready 2 Yield Soybean License Agreement (under which) the minimum obligation from Syngenta over this (nine-) year period is $81 million, reports the 10-Q.
Is Monsanto everywhere? Almost; according to its June SEC filing, it recently bought a vegetable seed company in Europe, a seed corn company in Guatemala, another in Brazil. In late March, Monsanto Co. sent a Dear Valued Customer letter to most U.S. corn and soybean farmers. The reason, wrote Jim Zimmer, Mo... more -
ExxonMoblil 2nd quarter $11.68 billion profits highest-ever for an American compan...
Rising Oil Prices Swell Profits at Exxon and Shell
Exxon Mobil, the world’s largest publicly traded oil company, reported on Thursday that second-quarter income rose 14 percent, to $11.68 billion, the highest-ever for an American company.
Net income of $2.22 a share compared with $10.26 billion, or $1.83 a share, in the quarter a year ago.
Revenue rose 40 percent, to $138.1 billion, from $98.4 billion in the quarter a year ago.
Excluding an after-tax charge of $290 million tied to an Exxon Valdez court settlement, earnings were $11.97 billion, or $2.27 a share.
Excluding one-time charges, analysts had expected Exxon Mobil to earn $2.52 a share on revenue of $144 billion, according to Thomson Financial.
With this quarter’s result, Exxon topped its own record of $11.66 billion in the fourth quarter of last year.
Earlier in London, Royal Dutch Shell, Europe’s largest oil company, reported a 33 percent increase in second-quarter profit on Thursday, helped by a higher oil price even as production declined.
Like a smaller rival BP earlier this week, Shell profited from an oil price that almost doubled in the second quarter from the year earlier, but a 13 percent drop from a record on July 11 raised some concern among investors about whether oil companies can keep up the pace of earnings growth. BP said earlier this week that higher oil prices have started to affect consumer demand for gasoline.
Shell’s profit rose to $11.56 billion from $8.67 billion in the period a year ago. BP reported a 28 percent increase in profit earlier this week and the Italian oil company Eni said on Thursday that profit in the second quarter rose 52 percent.
... Rising Oil Prices Swell Profits at Exxon and Shell ... more -
Bandwidth is the oil of the information economy
Americans today spend almost as much on bandwidth — the capacity to move information — as we do on energy. A family of four likely spends several hundred dollars a month on cellphones, cable television and Internet connections, which is about what we spend on gas and heating oil.
Just as the industrial revolution depended on oil and other energy sources, the information revolution is fueled by bandwidth. If we aren’t careful, we’re going to repeat the history of the oil industry by creating a bandwidth cartel.
Like energy, bandwidth is an essential economic input. You can’t run an engine without gas, or a cellphone without bandwidth. Both are also resources controlled by a tight group of producers, whether oil companies and Middle Eastern nations or communications companies like AT&T, Comcast and Vodafone. That’s why, as with energy, we need to develop alternative sources of bandwidth.
- - - - - -
The article goes on to discuss how we can take back the airwaves and create our own bandwidth sources, similar to putting solar panels up to create our own energy.
Isn't Google going to provide the internet to everyone in the world for free one day, solidifying their hold in world domination? Americans today spend almost as much on bandwidth — the capacity to move information — as we do on energy. A family of four likely spe... more -
Update on battle to drive Monsanto's bovine growth hormone off the market
The Organic Trade Association last month filed suit against a new milk labeling rule in Ohio that bans statements about production methods, such as "no artificial hormones."
This suit was the latest bid to block the lobbying by Monsanto Corp. advocates, who are seeking to limit milk labels state-by-state. The International Dairy Foods Association filed suit too.
If successful, the label limitations would prevent consumers from choosing milk that is produced without synthetic growth hormones. Monsanto argues that there is no difference between milk produced with the added growth hormones and milk without it. But consumers advocates - and consumers themselves - take a different view. They want choice.
A similar attempt by Pennsylvania to limit the wording of milk labels was overturned by the governor in January, after a letter writing campaign by consumers and advocacy groups.
Indiana also considered similar legislation, but it failed to get traction in the state legislature. A bill in Missouri failed to pass. Kansas considered a law but it didn't make it through the legislature, nor did an attempt in Vermont. A similar campaign in New Jersey has stalled.
Now, Kansas is revisiting the issue and Utah is considering rules similar to Ohio's.
It's all part of a concerted lobbying effort to save synthetic bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST), the milk-boosting genetically engineered drug Monsanto sells under the brand name Posilac. Although the hormone was approved for use by the Food and Drug Administration in 1993, it has been on a downward spiral as consumers, retailers, milk processors and dairy farmers avoid it.
In March, Walmart said all of its store-branded milk would come from cows not treated with rBGH. Kraft is introducing an rBGH-free line of cheese. Dean Foods, the largest milk processor in the nation, is moving away from the synthetic hormone. Kroger has banned the hormone from its store brand milk, as has Safeway.
The hormone has been outlawed in the European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan. Like all genetically modified food, it is banned in organic agriculture.
Aside from the impact on animal health, such as mastitis (an udder infection) consumer advocates are concerned that the synthetic hormone increases levels of IGF-1, a hormone that in some studies has been linked to increased breast and prostate cancer risk. Monsanto and the FDA say the hormone is safe.
In the US, the American Nurses Association recently voted to help "eliminate the use or rBGH in the US by appealing to those who make purchasing decisions within the institutions where we work."
So if nurses are so concerned, why are states trying to ban a label that would give consumers a way to avoid milk produced with the hormones?
"This is something the Monsanto lobby must do because the market is starting to work against the product," Michael Hansen, a staff scientist at Consumers Union, said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Isn't it rich how Monsanto now stoops to actually stating that injecting this hormone into cows helps stop global warming as if they care when they actually push ethanol? And it is so good to see progress being made to get their Posilac garbage out of our milk. A letter writing campaign in Pennsylvania by consumers and advocacy groups helped to overturn their bid. We can do it state by state if we truly do care about what we put into our bodies and about having proper disclosure of that. The Organic Trade Association last month filed suit against a new milk labeling rule in Ohio that bans statements about production met... more -
During a world food crisis, Monsanto raises corn seed prices to $100.00 a bag
Do you know who Monsanto is? They are a chemical corporation which made Agent Orange and after that, PCBs, with which they drowned the town of Anniston, Alabama for decades, even after knowing for sure that PCBs were highly carcinogenic. They make organophosphates, including glyphosate (Round-up) - which are highly neuro-toxic.
With this background in illness and killing, Monsanto then began "doing" your food. It genetically engineers food.
But before you say "Oh, that's good because genetic engineering is making food better, adding vitamins, growing bigger crops, ..." I have bad news for you. Please go to http://www.responsibletechnology.org and listen to Jeffrey Smith's lecture on how genetic engineering works and what it does to organs.
And as the greater yield PR, I suggest you read: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/IBTCF.php about the Bt-cotton fraud in India while Monsanto claims to have increased yield by 160%. http://www.monsanto.com/biotech-gmo/asp/news.asp?newsId... What do Indian farmers say? Indian farmers call Monsanto's Bt-cotton seeds, the Seeds of Death. http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/indiacotton012406.cf...
Beyond India, there are also problems. http://www.slogefree.org/news07/a-disaster-in-search-of...
Who to believe? Isn't this the same Monsanto that for four decades denied that PCBs caused cancer, while sitting on thousands of documents to the contrary? http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/ features/2008/05/monsanto200805
snip
It works like this: Monsanto gets George HW Bush to put one of its employees on the Supreme Court. From there, Clarence Thomas is in time to rule that genetically modified organisms are no different from normal organisms. Science by legal decision. Pandora's box of endlessly mutant organisms being let loose onto the world by Monsanto's influence over Bush and via one single law.
Clarence Thomas also ruled for an extreme extension of the intellectual property laws that allow Monsanto (and other biotech companies) to call their scrambling of DNA, "inventions" and through that, patent them. So, when a farmer buys GE-seeds, he doesn't buy just buy seeds, he buys himself into a deep, deep trap. For after buying the seeds and planting them and tending the plants all season, when the harvest comes and the farmer goes to collect seeds from those plants, Monsanto steps in and says "those are mine." Monsanto, in effect, claims to own biology itself, not just the process by which it screwed with the seeds, but all seeds forever from those seeds. In this way, this Monsanto as god way, it turns farmers into tenant farmers on their own land.
The two main crops in America, corn and soy - the basis of most our food, and now grains that are used for biofuels - are controlled by Monsanto. 90% of soy is GMO and of that, 90% of those traits "belong" to Monsanto. And for corn, the largest crop, 60% is GMO, nearly 100% are Monsanto "owned" traits. http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_9716.c...
snip
Now, maybe the news that Monsanto is raising the price of its GE-corn by $100 a bag will have due significance, since farmers have lost other seed companies, are threatened in saving their own seeds, and thus are left not only with a massive monopoly but one that then through patents, "owns" the farmer.
Notice, too, that Monsanto is drastically raising prices while it is making phenomenal profits, while food prices are rising dramatically (related often to its grains), leading to food riots around the world, and while fuel is skyrocketing and Monsanto's corn is now the basis of biofuel, and while our economy is tanking. All the while Monsanto claims that genetically engineering is a wonder - the way to help farmers around the world and to feed the hungry.
It's time to pay serious attention. Do you know who Monsanto is? They are a chemical corporation which made Agent Orange and after that, PCBs, with which they drowned the... more -
Top chefs say no to GM foods
More than 50 of the country's top chefs have united to protest against the introduction of genetically modified (GM) food crops to Australia.
Last month, GM canola crops were planted for the first time in NSW and Victoria after the two states announced they would let their bans on genetically engineered food crops expire.
In response, local celebrity chefs including Neil Perry and Kylie Kwong have signed on to the GM Free Chefs' Charter, launched in collaboration with Greenpeace in Sydney.
The charter, unveiled at chef Jared Ingersoll's Danks Street Depot restaurant in the inner-city Sydney suburb of Waterloo, calls for the NSW and Victorian governments to reverse their position on growing GM canola and demands thorough labelling of all food products that contain GM ingredients.
Oils, starches and sugars, as well as animal feed derived from GM ingredients, should all come with a label, says the charter, which will be presented to Australian governments later this year.
Meat from animals which have eaten GM feed should also be signposted, it says.
There are currently no laws on the labelling of food containing GM canola.
Speaking at the charter's launch, Mr Ingersoll said the unknown long-term effects of eating GM foods were a major concern to him, both as a chef and a parent.
"I don't really want to put food in the mouth of my children that I'm not sure whether or not it's going to be damaging for them," he said.
"I'm not the sort of person that stands in the way of technology making advancement to make things better for people ... but with genetically modified food, once we go down that path then there's no going back.
"We are in the very unique position of having an amazing countryside that can produce lots of beautiful food and if we do take the path of Canada and other GM nations, it's going to be really limiting as to what direction we go in," he said.
GM food crops are known to be difficult to contain, and a 2001 Western Australian parliamentary inquiry into gene technology found the segregation of GM crops from non-GM crops was not practical and cross-contamination was "inevitable". More than 50 of the country's top chefs have united to protest against the introduction of genetically modified (GM) food crops t... more -
OCM Supports State Attorney Generals Investigating Monsanto
The Organization for Competitive Markets and more than 35 farm and citizen groups voiced support for an ongoing antitrust investigation into Monsanto’s suspected anticompetitive practices in the U.S. crop seed industry last week in letters sent to 23 state attorneys general. About a dozen states are already involved in the investigation, including the attorneys general in Iowa and Texas.
“Concentration of market power in the seed industry has grave implications for American farmers,” said Keith Mudd, President of OCM. “Monsanto continues to control the marketplace in seed technologies, especially the corn, soybean, and cotton sectors.”
“We believe the company uses transgenic trait licensing agreements with independent seed companies as a tool to put smaller seed companies at a competitive disadvantage,” continued Mudd. “As a result, farmers and smaller seed companies face higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation in the crop seed marketplace. These companies need access to technology, but under fair and equitable terms.”
The Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) was joined by the American Corn Growers Association, National Farmers Organization, 10 state Farmers Unions, and dozens of others as signatories on the attorneys general letters.
The price for transgenic seed and glyphosate has skyrocketed, taking millions of dollars from farmers and rural America. Monsanto, however, is making record profits. “Farmers are already struggling with rising fuel and chemical prices, as well as planting problems,” Mudd added. “And now they must contend with higher prices for crop seed with less choice in the market.”
Monsanto maintains a dominant position in the marketplace by acquiring smaller competitors and merging with other companies. Last year, the Department of Justice agreed to allow Monsanto to acquire Delta & Pine Land Company, giving it a 90 percent share of the transgenic cotton seed market.
The company also enters into restrictive licensing agreements with seed dealers that are designed to gain market power, restrict competition, and prevent future innovation and market access by competitors.
“Independent seed companies are essential distribution channels for seed technologies, making up more than a quarter of the market,” said Fred Stokes, OCM’s Executive Director. “We believe Monsanto’s licensing agreements prohibit stacking its transgenic traits with non-Monsanto traits without any scientific reason. Farmers who prefer regional seed companies and their locally adapted varieties can’t access non-Monsanto traits restricted under these contracts. ”
Monsanto is also known to aggressively enforce its licensing agreements through lawsuits that seek to protect its patent rights. At times Monsanto mistakenly targets innocent farmers who undergo undue financial and emotional stress in their effort to avoid costly lawsuits. “Monsanto’s behavior has dramatically altered our rural communities,” Stokes said.
“We hope the state attorneys general will aggressively press this investigation. Control of crop seed must be diverse. This issue is of fundamental importance to the future of American agriculture,” Mudd said. “Farmers and independent seed companies deserve an open and fair seed marketplace. Consumers should not have to shoulder any further increase in food prices.” The Organization for Competitive Markets and more than 35 farm and citizen groups voiced support for an ongoing antitrust investigatio... more -
Campaign For Healthier Eating In America : Ban GMOs
Jeffrey M. Smith, international bestselling author and expert on the health dangers of genetically modified (GM) foods, describes the Campaign for Healthy Eating in America, and how it will achieve the tipping point of consumer resistance to GM foods. This will drive them out of the U.S. food supply as was accomplished in Europe and is already being witnessed in the rejection of genetically modified bovine growth hormone, rBGH, in the U.S. People are invited to participate in the campaign by signing up at http://www.responsibletechnology.org. Jeffrey M. Smith, international bestselling author and expert on the health dangers of genetically modified (GM) foods, describes the ... more
-
Sustainable Living: Is Your Picnic Filled With 'Frankenfoods?'
Some 200 million acres of the world's farms grew biotech crops last year, with over 90 percent of those crops coming from genetically engineered seeds patented by U.S.-based Monsanto.
Scientists have taken genetic material from one organism (like a soil bacterium), along with an antibiotic resistant marker gene, and spliced both into a food crop (like corn) to create a genetically modified crop that resists specific diseases and pests.
There has been no long-term, independent testing on the effects of these "Franken-foods" on the ecosystem or human health.
It would be difficult to avoid eating genetically modified organisms in our country because they are so pervasive in the food system and unlabeled in the grocery stores.
Part of the reason for this is biotech giants fought to keep GMO foods unlabeled.
Most recently, the growth hormones from GE organisms known as rBGH, which is given to cows to make them produce more milk, were banned in Europe and Canada after authorities learned about the health risks of drinking milk from cows treated with rBGH hormones.
American milk producers started labeling their milk "rBGH and rBST free." Monsanto, which sells bovine growth hormones under the brand name Posilac, has successfully sued dairy producers to force them to stop labeling their milk.
In addition to most milk products, GMOs can be found in commercially farmed meats and processed foods on store shelves. In our country, 89 percent of all soy, 61 percent of all corn, and 75 percent of all canola are genetically altered.
Other foods, like commercially grown papaya, zucchini, tomatoes, several fish species, and food additives like enzymes, flavorings and processing agents, including the sweetener aspartame and rennet used to make hard cheeses, also contain GMOs, according to Greenpeace.
To complicate matters, GMOs move around in the ecosystem through pollen, wind and natural cross-fertilization. The Union of Concerned Scientists conducted two independent laboratory tests on non-GM seeds "representing a substantial proportion of the traditional seed supply" for corn, soy and oilseed.
The test found that at "the most conservative expression," half the corn and soy were contaminated with GM genes, eight years after the modified varieties were first grown on a large scale in the U.S. Some 200 million acres of the world's farms grew biotech crops last year, with over 90 percent of those crops coming from genetic... more -
Monsanto patent fight ensnares Missouri farm town
Soybean farmer David Brumback calls himself a loyal customer of Monsanto Co. His product of choice: genetically engineered seeds resistant to pesticides and weed killers.
So when the biotech giant named Brumback and more than 100 other local farmers in a subpoena seeking five years of sales records, his first reaction was befuddlement. Then anger.
"With Monsanto, you're guilty until you're proven innocent," he said.
Across rural America, Monsanto is known for aggressive legal efforts to protect its patent. Farmers who save and replant the patented seeds in subsequent growing seasons quickly hear from the company's lawyers — and almost always lose, or settle out of court before trial.
Now Monsanto is raising the stakes against this so-called seed piracy with an unprecedented lawsuit against a farm co-op it accuses of aiding the illegal practice by cleaning seeds for use in future crops. That practice violates the contract between Monsanto and farmers which prohibits farmers from stockpiling seeds or selling second-generation seeds.
The St. Louis-based company says it's merely protecting an investment that exceeds $2 million a day in overall research and development costs.
Lawyers for the Pilot Grove Cooperative Elevator Inc. in the central Missouri town, population 750, offer a more nefarious explanation: Monsanto wants to make an example of the co-op through tactics that reek of bullying and intimidation.
"Monsanto is doing its best to make this case so expensive to defend that the co-op will have no choice but to relent," attorney Steven Schwartz wrote in a court motion filed earlier this year. The company sought purchase records and depositions from 114 Pilot Grove customers.
"Its true motive is to gather information for future lawsuits against the co-op, its customers and other farm businesses around Pilot Grove."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And with Monsanto taking over so much of the seed business, farmers have no where to go. This is truly nefarious. Soybean farmer David Brumback calls himself a loyal customer of Monsanto Co. His product of choice: genetically engineered seeds resis... more -
Cargill: A corporate threat to food and farming
International giant Cargill is one of a relatively small number of powerful corporations that control the global agricultural system. Cargill, among those with the widest and deepest influence, describes itself as an “international provider of food, agricultural and risk management products and services. With 158,000 employees in 66 countries, the company is committed to using its knowledge and experience to collaborate with customers to help them succeed.” Still in family hands, Cargill is the largest privately owned company in the world. Its grain division is the number one source of grains and oil-seeds in North America for domestic use, as well as exporting, and it is a major player in the beef and poultry industries.
With so many business sectors, operating divisions, and locations across the globe, keeping tabs on the specifics of Cargill is difficult. But in general, the Minneapolis-based company markets, processes, packs, distributes, transports, and trades agricultural, food, industrial, and other products and services. It is a leading grain processor and a top U.S. meat packer, but more importantly, it greatly influences – and some analysts would say it controls – both markets. Cargill deals with wheat, corn, and oilseeds; meats, poultry, and fish; industrial products such as biofuels, oils, lubricants, and salts; health and pharmaceutical products; and agricultural services such as animal feed and fertilizers.
In short, Cargill sells farmers many of the inputs they need, and buys much of their output for trading and processing. The corporate behemoth has created a worldwide agricultural system in which it is both buyer and seller, and as a result has reaped massive profits. It reported profits of $2.34 billion for the 2007 fiscal year. Unfortunately, Cargill has not been as successful in protecting the rights of consumers, workers, or the environment as it has been in adapting profitable business strategies.
Cargill threatens the environment in both the United States and abroad. It has spilled toxic waste into the San Francisco Bay, violated the Clean Air Act with harmful emissions, and deforested key habitats for endangered species in South America.
~~~~~~~~~
Monsanto has company. International giant Cargill is one of a relatively small number of powerful corporations that control the global agricultural system. ... more -
Time-Warner customers will have to pay for bandwidth
"This Thursday, new cable Internet customers in Beaumont, Texas will no longer have unmetered Internet bandwidth - they’re guinea pigs in a new pricing scheme being pushed by Time-Warner that will give users between 5 and 40 gigabytes in total monthly data usage (uploads and downloads combined). Data usage over that amount will be billed at $1 per gigabyte. Competitor Comcast is also considering metered bandwidth.
"The goal is to limit average data usage, allowing Time-Warner to get more customers into their existing fiber infrastructure. Since there is little or no competition for Internet connectivity, they don’t have to worry so much about losing customers."
Ah, the joy of cable and internet monopolies. "This Thursday, new cable Internet customers in Beaumont, Texas will no longer have unmetered Internet bandwidth - they’re guinea... more -
The World According To Monsanto: The Future of Food
There is a revolution going on in the farm fields and on the dinner tables of America, a revolution that is transforming the very nature of the food we eat. THE FUTURE OF FOOD offers an in-depth investigation into the disturbing truth behind the unlabeled, patented, genetically engineered foods that have quietly filled U.S. grocery store shelves for the past decade. There is a revolution going on in the farm fields and on the dinner tables of America, a revolution that is transforming the very natu... more
-
related topics
Monopolies
Contributors (125)
Monopolies
